This week golf celebrates the first of it’s four “majors.” The Masters tournament at Augusta National Golf Club in Georgia is on the PGA schedule every year during the first full weekend in April. It was first played in 1934. The course, and by extension the club, will be fawned over and spoken about in reverent tones on CBS.

But shouldn’t we be repulsed by the past discrimination which was as natural to it’s membership as the famous magnolias and pine straw. By all accounts the environment has not really changed very much. The story is not pretty.

Augusta kept black golfers out of the Masters tournament for 40 years. Lee Elder was able to play in the 1975 Masters not because he was invited. It was only because he won a PGA tournament (1974 Monsanto Open) which granted automatic qualification to the Masters that he gained entrance.

But it would be another 16 years before a black man would be invited for club membership.

The reality is clear: Augusta had to be dragged kicking and screaming into changing their membership criteria. And it is still barely acceptable.

In my opinion the club should be able to admit (and not admit) whomever they want. They are a private club and should control their membership requirements. If it were up to me I would overturn the “public accommodation” findings in the 1964 Civil Rights Act and other state provisions. In a truly free society a business owner should be allowed to decide with whom he trades. But the other side of that right is the freedom of potential customers to take their business elsewhere.

Few are the private golfers who would turn down an opportunity to play Augusta. Many are willing to overlook past transgressions, and current practices, for a chance to experience Amen Corner, et al.

But shouldn’t you ask yourself whether you would patronize a restaurant or other private business which was so discriminatory?

Lefties heads are exploding over a statement which was read on air by many news anchors at Sinclair Broadcast Group owned television stations. The blogosphere and sites run by the usual liberal suspects are outraged. Here is a typical headline:

The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media. More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories without checking facts first. Unfortunately, some members of the media use their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control exactly what people think. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.

At [station], it is our responsibility to report and pursue the truth. We understand the truth is neither politically left nor right. Our commitment to factual reporting is the foundation of our credibility now more than ever. But we are human, and sometimes our reporting might fall short. If you believe our coverage is unfair, please reach out through our [station] website by clicking on “Content Concerns.” We value your comments and we will respond back to you.

We work very hard to seek the truth and strive to be fair, balanced, and factual. We consider it our honor and privilege to responsibly deliver the news every day. Thank you for watching, and we appreciate your feedback.

Not sure what is “right wing” about committing to pursue and report truth. You have to wonder if any of the people freaking out about this actually read the statement. Or did they just see a leftie criticism and decide to use the statement as their own “fake news.”

Parkland HS students returning to school after spring break were not happy with some of the safety improvements, including a change to only allow backpacks if they are clear.

Students are learning what happens when strangers show up and say “We’re from the government and we’re here to help you.” They end up pushing for post-shooting “solutions” such as low capacity magazines, waiting periods, or stronger background checks, none of which would have prevented this heinous shooting.

I love Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and was sad when he announced that he would not run for reelection.

But the irony of him voting for the disgusting omnibus bill while calling out Interior Secretary Zinke for “overspending” on an office door is too much.

Reuters says:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Republican head of a government oversight panel in Congress asked U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke this week to provide details on a contract to replace doors in his office that initially ran to $139,000, one of several inquiries by lawmakers of spending by Trump administration officials.

In a letter dated March 22 and seen by Reuters, U.S. House of Representatives oversight committee chairman Trey Gowdy asked Zinke to brief him on the need to replace the doors and provide details on the acquisition process, bidding and receipts.

Those following the recent budget process will note that Gowdy voted FOR HR1625, the “Omnibus” spending bill loaded with pork, which will add trillions to the national debt.

Under this new policy, we will require new retail sector clients or partners to adhere to these best practices: (1) they don’t sell firearms to someone who hasn’t passed a background check, (2) they restrict the sale of firearms for individuals under 21 years of age, and (3) they don’t sell bump stocks or high-capacity magazines.

1 – In many states a private seller does not have the ability to do a NICS background check

2 – How does Citi decide that a state which allows 18 -21 year old citizens is a problem?

3 – What is a “high-capacity magazine?” 5,6,7,10,30?

They are telling 2A proponents that they don’t want your business. Act accordingly and take your business elsewhere. That’s what I am doing. I’ve already opened a new CC account with a friendly company.

In today’s world it seems that every good idea needs to be codified, legislated, and forced on everyone.

J.D. Tuccille thinks otherwise

Because people are forever looking to the law as the solution to the ills they perceive in the world around them—often only to spackle over the failures of the previous round of laws. In the process, they’re forever forgetting that laws are usually nothing more than codified prejudices, imposed against resistant populations, by sometimes incompetent and often corrupt enforcers.

To start, in a free society asking why someone else “needs” something, something that is legal, is the wrong question.

This article isn’t my attempt to justify anything to you — it’s not a defense of what’s in my gun safe or of the AR-15 itself. If, for you, my AR-15 ownership is prima facie evidence of my mental instability, sexual inadequacy, lack of a conscience, or what-have-you, then I honestly don’t care what you think about this issue. You can go back to broadcasting your own moral superiority on social media, and I can go back to tuning you out until your rage therapy session is over.

Mueller scours Team Trump for Russian collusion as Dems marinate in it

So, the relentless, fruitless quest for Russian collusion among Team Trump instead finds it alive and well among Team Clinton — and as tough to detect as a May Day march through Red Square.

If Special Counsel Robert Mueller sincerely wishes to expose Russian collusion in general, rather than search in vain for the Republican strain of this virus, he should scrutinize the other side of the aisle. Democrats colluded with Russia from 2009 to at least 2016.

The people and entities listed below are not satisfied with expressing their own opinion. They have called for a boycott of the NRA in general and also threatened other entities if they won’t agree to boycott also. Twitter hashtag for the boycott is #BoycottNRA

They have a right to their opinion. I have a right to decide I don’t want to fund their anti-American political agenda.

They don’t want a public debate. They are calling for the NRA to be silenced. Multiple calls for Amazon, Google Play, Roku, etc. to remove NRATV from their platforms.

Customer feedback has caused us to review our relationship with the NRA. As a result, First National Bank of Omaha will not renew its contract with the National Rifle Association to issue the NRA Visa Card.